Coverage

Making the most of opening statements

Making the most of opening statements

27 April 2017

Speakers at GAR Live Stockholm today questioned whether opening statements are useful in arbitration – and whether counsel can make them more effective through being brief, submitting written arguments or relying on visual aids, even Casablanca.

White & Case partner calls for privilege rethink

White & Case partner calls for privilege rethink

28 April 2017

White & Case partner Phillip Capper told an audience at GAR Live Stockholm yesterday he had reconsidered his one-time opposition to having more rules in arbitration and called on the arbitration community to consider a new set covering privileged documents.

“Bonkers” or necessary? Summary dismissal debated at GAR Live Stockholm

“Bonkers” or necessary? Summary dismissal debated at GAR Live Stockholm

12 June 2017

As the SCC Arbitration Institute’s new summary dismissal procedure beds in, a debate at GAR Live Stockholm highlighted the danger that an innovation intended to cut off frivolous claims may instead prove yet another way to spin out arbitrations.

GAR Live lookback - Stockholm: what's the point of opening statements?

GAR Live lookback - Stockholm: what's the point of opening statements?

08 September 2017

What's the point of opening statements? Are counsel making the most of them or are they the proverbial 'missed opportunity'? That was the jumping-off point for a session at GAR Live Stockholm this year.

GAR Live Lookback: Stockholm - What makes a good arbitrator?

GAR Live Lookback: Stockholm - What makes a good arbitrator?

01 March 2018

What does ‘good’ look like when it comes to dealing with requests for timetable dispensations, to reading-in, or to handling difficult wing arbitrators? Those questions, and more, were debated in session three of GAR Live Stockholm 2017, which attempted to answer the very big question of “what makes a ‘good’ arbitrator”?

GAR Live Stockholm Lookback: documents, direct testimony and toxic data

GAR Live Stockholm Lookback: documents, direct testimony and toxic data

08 May 2018

The last GAR Live Stockholm featured a symposium moderated by James Hope of Vinge and Jakob Ragnwald of Mannheimer Swartling. Topics ranged from the pain of Redfern schedules to the danger of arbitrator data projects, discussed by the likes of George Bermann, Patricia Shaughnessy and Hilary Heilbron QC, with only one rule: nobody could begin their comment “it depends …”

Chairs

Jakob Ragnwaldh

Mannheimer Swartling

Jakob Ragnwaldh is a partner in Mannheimer Swartling’s Dispute Resolution practice group focusing on international arbitration. He is Vice-Chair of the board of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce and serves as the Chair of the Executive Board of the European Federation for Investment Law and Arbitration (EFILA). Jakob Ragnwaldh is also the Chairman of the SCC Rules Revision Committee. 

James Hope

Vinge

James Hope is a partner and Head of Vinge’s dispute resolution group in Stockholm. He is a dual-qualified Swedish Advokat and English Solicitor- Advocate, with over 20 years’ experience of dispute resolution, including 10 years’ experience from practising in London. He is also a memberof the Board of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce.

Speakers

Fredrik Andersson

Mannheimer Swartling

George Bermann

Columbia Law School

Daniel Busse

Allen & Overy

Phillip Capper

White & Case and King's College London

Nils Eliasson

Shearman & Sterling

Pontus Ewerlöf

MAQS

Charlotta Falkman

Gernandt & Danielsson

Hilary Heilbron QC

Brick Court Chambers

​Penny Madden

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher

Iain McKenny

Vannin Capital

Fredrik Norburg

Norburg & Scherp

Mattias Rosengren

Vinge

Patricia Shaughnessy

Department of Law, Stockholm University

Huawei Sun

Zhong Lun Law Firm

Anna-Maria Tamminen

Hannes Snellman

Patrick Taylor

Debevoise & Plimpton

Rikard Wikström

Roschier

Programme

8.30: Welcome coffee and registration

9.00: Chair’s welcome
 

Jakob Ragnwaldh, Mannheimer Swartling

9.10: Session one: Opening statements – a missed opportunity?

Arbitration hearings almost invariably start with opening statements, but how are these best delivered? Do counsel make the most of the opportunity they present?

Questions the panel are expected to discuss include:
- Short summaries vs detail – do summaries suffice, on the basis that the arbitrators have read all of the documents? Or should statements present the written evidence in the case? 
- “Skeleton arguments” – always a necessary addition?
- Best practice – in terms of using PowerPoint slides, core bundles, etc.

Moderator:
James Hope, Vinge

Panel:
Pontus Ewerlöf, MAQS
Fredrik Norburg, Norburg & Scherp
Huawei Sun, Zhong Lun Law Firm
Nils Eliasson, Shearman & Sterling

10.45: Coffee break

11.15: Session two: The GAR Live symposium 

Our espresso version of the famous Tylney Hall format.

Moderators:
Jakob Ragnwaldh, Mannheimer Swartling
James Hope, Vinge

12.30: Networking lunch

13:30: Lunchtime address

Phillip Capper, White & Case and King's College London

14.00: Session three: What makes a good arbitrator?

Arbitrators frequently comment on how counsel should improve, yet rarely is there an opportunity for constructive feedback in the other direction. Here is your chance to see the shoe on the other foot. What do arbitrators do well, what could they do better, and what qualities make an arbitrator truly stand out? 

Drawing on their collective “war storiesˮ, the panel will come up with a list of helpful pointers for arbitrators to bear in mind.

Moderator:
George Bermann, Columbia Law School

Panel:
Rikard Wikström, Roschier
Anna-Maria Tamminen, Hannes Snellman
Hilary Heilbron QC, Brick Court Chambers
Iain McKenny, Vannin Capital

15.15: Coffee break

15.45: Session four: The GAR Live Debate

Motion:"The new SCC rule on summary procedure will cause more problems than it solves"

Moderator:
Patricia Shaughnessy, Stockholm University

Debaters:
Patrick Taylor, Debevoise & Plimpton
Penny Madden, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
Daniel Busse, Allen & Overy
Fredrik Andersson, Mannheimer Swartling

Judges:
Mattias Rosengren, Vinge
Charlotta Falkman, Gernandt & Danielsson
Phillip Capper, White & Case and King's College London

17.00: Chair’s closing remarks

James Hope, Vinge

17.15 onwards: All delegates are invited to attend a drinks reception at the SCC

Venue

Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, Brunnsgatan 2, 111 38 Stockholm, Sweden

Prices

Private Practitioner

Type

Price

Until

Super Early

£650

24 Mar 2017

Early

£750

14 Apr 2017

Standard

£850

27 Apr 2017

 

In-house/governmental

Type

Price

Until

Super Early

£250

27 Apr 2017